Mo Elleithee, executive director of the Georgetown Institute of Politics and Public Service, served as communications director for the Democratic National Committee from August of 2013 until June of this year.

Former Hillary Clinton Spokesman: There’s No Republican War on Women

For years, Democratic Party leaders have attacked Republicans for waging a “war on women.” Now a former spokesman for the Democratic National Committee — and Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign — is denouncing that rhetoric as “overly incendiary,” “not true,” and part of why Americans hate politics.

“I do not believe that there’s any sort of Republican war on women,” Mo Elleithee said Tuesday. “I hate when people say that, just as I hate when Republicans say that there’s a Democratic war on religion or the military.”

Elleithee made his comments at an event for Georgetown University’s Institute of Politics and Public Service, which he’s run since leaving the DNC in June. The longtime Democratic operative later told InsideSources that Republican policies are bad for women, but “overly hyped” political language turns voters off.

“I hate when there’s rhetoric that’s overly incendiary,” he said in an interview. “I hate when there’s rhetoric that’s just not true. When you say there’s a war on something, that means you’re out to destroy it. Republicans aren’t out to destroy women.”

Elleithee doesn’t think he used the phrase “war on women” during his tenure at the DNC, which began in August 2013. (In fact, he started distancing himself from the term years ago.) Still, there’s no question the language has been part of the Democrats’ national messaging.

Elleithee’s predecessor as the party’s communications director, Brad Woodhouse, told Slate he was “not a fan of the term” after it caused controversy in April of 2012, but admitted he’d “probably used it.” DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz used itrepeatedly starting in March of 2011, and the Florida congresswoman has continued to raise eyebrows with similar inflammatory rhetoric.

Just last year, she compared Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s policies to domestic abuse, saying Walker had “given women the back of his hand.”

“I know that is stark. I know that is direct. But that is reality,” she said. “What Republican tea party extremists like Scott Walker are doing is they are grabbing us by the hair and pulling us back.”

Those remarks sparked massive backlash, including from many Democrats, and Wasserman Schultz later said she should have chosen different words.

Another of Elleithee’s former bosses used some fairly harsh language about Republicans and women this year. Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, for whom Elleithee was a senior spokesman in 2008, criticized congressional Republicans in March for a “trifecta against women.” (The former secretary of state was upset by delay over Loretta Lynch’s nomination to be attorney general and the state of a human trafficking bill held up by an abortion provision.)

“Now, extreme views about women, we expect that from some of the terrorist groups, we expect that from people who don’t want to live in the modern world, but it’s a little hard to take from Republicans who want to be the president of the United States,” she said.

Elleithee acknowledged he’s guilty of using inflated language in his career, and said he’s “not proud of that.” He even called himself “one of the guys who broke the [political] system.”

Through his work at Georgetown, he hopes to help the next generation of operatives use better rhetoric, maintaining a passionate partisanship while draining some of the poison from today’s politics.

About the Author

Graham Vyse is a reporter for InsideSources. He was previously a staff writer for Washington, D.C.'s Current Newspapers, where he appeared on "The Fix’s 2015 list of best state political reporters" in the Washington Post. His work has also been published by the Post, Slate, and NBC News. Born and raised in Rhode Island, Graham received a master's degree in journalism and public affairs from American University in 2013. He was awarded a Paul Miller Washington Reporting Fellowship at the National Press Foundation in 2015.

The only war on woman has come from the Democrats more so Hillary when she
attacked those that where accusing her husband of sexual contact. Than woman
where the bimbo express. Or how about when Hillary was laughing when she got a
rapist off that she knew was guilty. The so called war on woman was a
distraction. When will people figure out when the Democrats say there is a war
against something…they are projecting because they are the worst offenders.
The time to speak up was when it was happening not after he left her camp. But
that is how progressives work.

This article illustrates that politicians cannot help themselves from misrepresenting the truth because we’ve made it a prerequisite to gaining power in the United States. Part of the blame for this rests with the electorate. We enable them inflame the situation when we avoid our own independent thinking. What I’ve come to realize is that no single politician or political party encompasses my views and I won’t let them make it a package deal. The package deal is one dimension of the scam they perpetuate. And this hurts the idea of the United States. This is why Americans thirst for a genuinely independent candidate (sorry Hillary, that will never, ever, ever be you) who is willing to choose positions that make sense, without the inflammatory garbage. So, even though Mr. Trump is boorish, he is polling higher because he appears independent. So, even though Mr. Sanders calls himself a socialist, he is running relatively well in spite of his own party trying to destroy him. 2016 is not an election. It is a production run by the intelligence community to get Hillary into the White House by making her look like the most sensible candidate (in contrast to Trump and Sanders). It is a planned psy-op and I think it is highly possible that Trump and Sanders are in on it too. I think the American people are starting to catch on. Awareness is step one.